With respect to the lead in toys, for example, the situation we were faced with a year ago was that there was lead in toys. I don't think, by having a labelling provision for lead, the companies that illegally used lead and put it in toys would label for it. I just think there's a disconnect there.
With respect to GHS and dealing with chronic hazards, I think GHS is something that will not target all the products that you want to target. GHS is going to be focused on dealing with products that are subject to CCCR, which is my products as well as paint, for example, but it won't deal with things like food or cosmetics or other products.
So if you're going to do a labelling approach and you want to change it from a risk communication approach and move into hazard, then you need to look at all the facts and provide meaningful information to consumers.